Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How to assess hydromorphology? A comparison of Ukrainian and German approaches

  • Special Issue
  • Published:
Environmental Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, the Ukrainian Western Bug water authorities developed a national field survey to assess the quality of river habitats. The Ukrainian government already cooperates with EU member states along transboundary rivers and also orientates itself towards the European Water Framework Directive (WFD). As a future application for EU membership is feasible, the water authorities started to implement WFD criteria into their national survey schemes including the assessment of rivers’ hydromorphology. This article compares two different hydromorphological survey methods to identify similarities and differences of the classification approaches with regard to the conformity of obtained outputs with the WFD demands. The field surveys, the Ukrainian (UA-FS) and the German (LAWA-FS), were applied in parallel on 14 river sections along the Western Bug River and parts of its tributaries. Results show a wide range of conformity, but also several differences between and gaps within all methods. The UA-FS generally lacks the idea of reference condition in rivers’ hydromorphology and the definition of different stream types or near-natural land uses. The UA-FS and the LAWA-FS approaches are similar with respect to their incorporated compartments and most main parameters, but differ in definition and interpretation of specific functional units and single parameters. Greatest similarities down to single parameters exist in aspects of land use, bank vegetation, currents diversity, and within-stream variation of water depths. Differences include the assessment and interpretation of lateral erosion, sinuosity, type and depth of profile, substrate diversity, as well as special structures of bank and riverbed. Overall, the LAWA-FS is more conservative in its rating than the UA-FS. Still, UA-FS can be regarded as an important improvement for a systematic and reliable monitoring of river hydromorphology in the Ukraine that will help to successfully engage with both the integrated water resources management and the WFD harmonisation process in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

WFD:

European Water Framework Directive

LAWA:

Bund/Länder-Arbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser

UA:

Ukrainian

FS:

Field survey

IWRM:

Integrated water resources management

References

  • Agence d l E R-M (1996) Outil d’évaluation de la qualité du lilieu physique–synthèse, Metz

  • Anonymous (n.d.) Пpoтoкoл Гiдpoмopфoлoгiчнoї oцiнки Protokoll Hydromorphologische Bewertung дoдaтoк 1 Anhang 1 p. 42; дoдaтoк A: гiдpoмopфoлoгiчнe дocлiджeння. Укpaїнa p. 4, Anhang A: Hydromorphologische Untersuchung—Ukraine; пpoтoкoл дocлiджeння мicцeвocтi Protokoll der Geländeuntersuchung; Дoдaтoк B: гiдpoмopфoлoгiчнe дocлiджeння. Укpaїнa Anhang B: Hydromorphologische Untersuchung—Ukraine; фopмa oцiнки—cтpyктypнa xapaктepиcтикa Beurteilungsform: Strukturcharakteristik p. 2; дoдaтoк C: гiдpoмopфoлoгiчнe дocлiджeння—Cлoвaчинa Anhang C: Hydromorphologische Untersuchung—Slovakei, фopмa oцiнки—Гiдpoлoгiчнa xapaктepиcтикa Bewertungsform—Hydrologische Charakteristik p. 1. Western Bug Basin Department (Зaxiднo-Бyзькe бaceйнoвe yпpaвлiння вoдниx pecypciв БУBP), March Street 8, 43005 Lutsk, Ukraine mailto:info@zbbuvr.lutsk.ua. http://zbbuvr.lutsk.ua

  • Baattrup-Pedersen A, Friberg N, Larsen SE, Riis T (2005) The influence of channelisation on riparian plant assemblages. Freshw Biol 50:1248–1261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baattrup-Pedersen A, Riis T (1999) Macrophyte diversity and composition in relation to substratum characteristics in regulated and unregulated Danish streams. Freshw Biol 42:375–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baattrup-Pedersen A, Szoszkiewicz K, Nijboer R, O’Hare M, Ferreira T (2006) Macrophyte communities in unimpacted European streams: variability in assemblage patterns, abundance and diversity. Hydrobiologia 566:179–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baattrup-Pedersen A, Kristensen EA, Jorgensen J, Skriver J, Kronvang B, Andersen HE, Hoffman CC, Larsen LMK (2009) Can a priori defined reference criteria be used to select reference sites in Danish streams? Implications for implementing the Water Framework Directive. J Environ Monit 11:344–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bathe F (2010) Die Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in Deutschland—eine vergleichende Analyse der Entwürfe der Bewirtschaftungspläne. Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung-UFZ, Department Ökonomie. http://www.ufz.de/data/ufzbericht_1_2010_12646.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2011

  • Blumensaat F, Wolfram M, Krebs P (2011) Sewer model development under minimum data requiremens. Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-011-1146-1 (this issue)

  • BMU (2006) Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit. Die Wasserrahmenrichtlinie—Ergebnisse der Bestandsaufnahme 2004 in Deutschland. http://bmu.de/gewaesserschutz/downloads/doc/35242.php. Accessed 21 Jan 2009

  • Chatzinikolaou Y, Dakos V, Lazaridou M (2008) Assessing the ecological integrity of a major transboundary Mediterranean river based on environmental habitat variables and benthic macroinvertebrates (Aoos-Vjose river, Greece-Albania). Int Rev Hydrobiol 93:73–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boon PJ, Holmes NTH, Raven PJ (2010) Developing standard approaches for recording and assessing river hydromorphology: the role of the European Committee for Standardization (CEN). Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 20:55–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BSI (2004) British Standard Institution EN 14614 Water quality: guidance standard for assessing the hydromophological features of rivers. BSI, London

    Google Scholar 

  • BSI (2010) British Standard Institution EN 15843 Water quality: guidance standard for assessing the hydromophological features of rivers. BSI, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Chovanec A, Jager P, Jungwirth M, Koller-Kreimel V, Moog O, Muhar S, Schmutz S (2000) The Austrian way of assessing the ecological integrity of running waters: a contribution to the EU Water Framework Directive. Hydrobiologia 422:445–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chytry M, Jarosik V, Pysek P, Hajek O, Knollova I, Tichy L, Danihelka J (2008) Separating habitat invasibility by alien plants from the actual level of invasion. Ecology 89:1541–1553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clews E, Vaughan IP, Ormerod SJ (2010) Evaluating the effects of riparian restoration on a temperate river-system using standardized habitat survey. Aquat Conserv Marine Freshw Ecosyst 20:96–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton JBJ (2006) The Western Bug River—UNECE Pilot River. In: Bochniarz Z, Cohen GB (eds) The environment and sustainable development in the new Central Europe. Berghahn Books, New York, pp 151–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Davy-Bowker J, Furse MT (2006) Hydromorphology—major results and conclusions from the STAR project. Hydrobiologia 566:263–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demydenko A, Tsvetkova A (2008) Assessment of the draft national targeted program for water management development up to 2020. http://www.gwptoolbox.org/images/stories/cases/en/cs_383_ukraine_full_final.pdf; http://www.gwptoolbox.org/index.php?option=com_case&id=270&Itemid=47. Accessed 23 Nov 2010

  • De Stefano L (2010) International initiatives for water policy assessment: a review. Water Resour Manage 24:2449–2466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DIN EN 15843 (2010) Wasserbeschaffenheit—Anleitung zur Beurteilung von Veränderung der hydromorphologischen Eigenschaften von Fließgewässern; Deutsche Fassung EN 15843:2010 (water quality—guidance standard on determining the degree of modification of river hydromorphology: German version EN 15843:2010. Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin, p 28

  • DIN EN 14614 (2005) Wasserbeschaffenheit – Anleitung zur Beurteilung hydromorphologischer Eigenschaften von Fließgewässern

  • Dodkins I, Rippey B, Harrington TJ, Bradley C, Ni Chathain B, Kelly-Quinn M, McGarrigle M, Hodge S, Trigg D (2005) Developing an optimal river typology for biological elements within the Water Framework Directive. Water Res 39:3479–3486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donohue I, McGarrigle ML, Mills P (2006) Linking catchment characteristics and water chemistry with the ecological status of Irish rivers. Water Res 40:91–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EEA (2004) European environmental agency ecoregions for rivers and lakes. http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/ecoregions-for-rivers-and-lakes. Accessed 21 Nov 2010

  • EN 14614 (2004) Water quality—guidance standard for assessing the hydromorphological features of rivers

  • Ertel A-M, Lupo A, Scheifhacken N, Bodnarchuk T, Manturova O, Berendonk TU, Petzoldt T (2011) Heavy load and high potential. Anthropogenic pressures and their impacts on the water quality along a lowland river (Western Bug, Ukraine). Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-011-1289-0 (this issue)

  • EC (2000) Directive 2000/60/EEC, establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy, Brussels

  • EC (2003a) WFD Guidance Document No. 10, rivers and lakes—Typology, reference condition and classification systems. Working Group 2.3-REFCOND

  • EC (2003b) WFD Guidance Document No. 4 Identification and Designation of Artificial and Heavily Modified Water Bodies. Published by the directorate general environment of the european commission, Brussel. ISBN 92-894-5124-6, ISSN 1725-1087

  • EC (2007) Communication from the commission to the European Parliament and the Council—towards sustainable water management in the European Union (COM/2007/0128)—first stage in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC—[SEC(2007) 362]. http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/agriculture/environment/l28002b_en.htm; http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52007DC0128:EN:NOT. Accessed 05 Sept 2010

  • Environment Agency (2003) River habitat survey in britain and ireland. field survey guidance manual: 2003 Version. Published by Enviroment Agency, Bristol. http://www.irpi.to.cnr.it/documenti/RHS%20manual%202003.PDF. Accessed 19 June 2011

  • Erba S, Buffagni A, Holmes N, O’Hare M, Scarlett P, Stenico A (2006) Preliminary testing of River Habitat Survey features for the aims of the WFD hydromorphological assessment: an overview from the STAR Project. Hydrobiologia 566:281–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Communities (2003) Convergence with EU environmental legislation in Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia: a guide. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enlarg/pdf/convergence_guide_en.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2011

  • Feld CK (2004) Identification and measure of hydromorphological degradation in Central European lowland streams. Hydrobiologia 516:69–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleischhacker T, Kern K (2002) Ecomorphological survey of large rivers, manual. German Federal Institute of Hydrology, Koblenz

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin P, Dunbar M, Whitehead P (2008) Flow controls on lowland river macrophytes: areview. Sci Total Environ 400:369–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furse M, Hering D, Moog O, Verdonschot P, Johnson RK, Brabec K, Gritzalis K, Buffagni A, Pinto P, Friberg N, Murray-Bligh J, Kokes J, Alber R, Usseglio-Polatera P, Haase P, Sweeting R, Bis B, Szoszkiewicz K, Soszka H, Springe G, Sporka F, Krno I (2006) The STAR project: context, objectives and approaches. Hydrobiologia 566:3–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GWP (2000) Integrated water resources management. Global Water Partnership Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) TAC Background Papers No 4. http://www.unep.org/civil_society/GCSF8/pdfs/IWRM_water_efficiency_eng.pdf. Accessed 11 Aug 2011

  • GWP CEE (2008) Global Water Partnership Central and Eastern Europe. http://www.gwpceeforum.-org/File/Regional%20profile%202008_GWP%20CEE.pdf including GWP Country Water Partnership Ukraine access also at http://www.gwpceeforum.org/?page=69. Accessed 23 Nov 2010

  • Heiskanen AS, van de Bund W, Cardoso AC, Noges P (2004) Towards good ecological status of surface waters in Europe—interpretation and harmonisation of the concept. Water Sci Technol 49:169–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Haase P, Lohse S, Pauls S, Schindehutte K, Sundermann A, Rolauffs P, Hering D (2004) Assessing streams in Germany with benthic invertebrates: development of a practical standardised protocol for macro invertebrate sampling and sorting. Limnologica 34:349–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding JS, Young RG, Hayes JW, Shearer KA, Stark JD (1999) Changes in agricultural intensity and river health along a river continuum. Freshw Biol 42:345–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hering D, Moog O, Sandin L, Verdonschot PFM (2004) Overview and application of the AQEM assessment system. Hydrobiologia 516:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Illies J (1978) Limnofauna Europaea. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart, p 532

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalbus E, Kalbacher T, Kolditz O, Krüger E, Seegert J, Teusch G, Borchardt D, Krebs P (2011) IWAS—integrated water resources management under different hydrological, climatic and socio-economic conditions. Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-011-1330-3 (this issue)

  • Kamp U, Binder W, Hölzl K (2007) River habitat monitoring and assessment in Germany. Environ Monit Assess 127:209–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kampragou E, Eleftheriadou E, Mylopoulos Y (2007) Implementing equitable water allocation in trans-boundary catchments: the case of river Nestos/Mesta. Water Resour Manag 21:909–918

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krno I, Sporka F, Pastuchova Z, Derka T, Ciamporova-Zatovicova Z, Bulankova E, Hamerlik L, Illesova D (2007) Assessment of the ecological status of streams in two carpathian subregions. Int Rev Hydrobiol 92:564–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krysanova V, Buiteveld H, Haase D, Hattermann FF, van Niekerk K, Roest K, Martinez-Santos P, Schluter M (2008) Practices and lessons learned in coping with climatic hazards at the river-basin scale: floods and droughts. Ecol Soc 13 (article no.: 32)

  • LAWA (2000) Gewässerstrukturgütekartierung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland Verfahren für kleine und mittelgroße Fließgewässer. Kulturbuch-Verlag GmbH, p 145. http://www.kulturbuch-verlag.de, ISBN-Nr. 3-88961-233-4

  • LAWA (2002) Gewässergüteatlas der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Biologische Gewässergütekarte 2000, Berlin

  • LAWA (2004) Gewässerstrukturkartierung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland Übersichtsverfahren. Kulturbuch-Verlag GmbH, p 28. http://www.kulturbuch-verlag.de, ISBN-Nr. 3-88961-249-0

  • Leidel M, Niemann S, Hagemann N (2011) Capacity development as key factor for integrated water resources management (IWRM)—improving water management in the Western Bug River Basin, Ukraine. Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-011-1223-5 (this issue)

  • Lehotský M, Grešková A (2005) Basic classification systems and morphometric characteristics of channel-floodplain geosystems. Geomorphol Slovaca 5:5–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehotský M, Grešková A (2003) Geomorphology, fluvial geosystems and riverine lanscape (methodological apsects). Geomorphol Slovaca 2:47–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenz A, Hering D, Feld CK, Rolauffs P (2004) A new method for assessing the impact of hydromorphological degradation on the macroinvertebrate fauna of five German stream types. Hydrobiologia 516:107–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LUA (2001) Gewässerstrukturgüte in Nordrhein-Westfalen—Anleitung für die Kartierung mittelgroßer bis großer Fließgewässer, Landesumweltamt NRW, Postfach 102 363, 45023 Essen, p 152. http://www.lanuv.nrw.de/veroeffentlichungen/merkbl/merkbl26_web.pdf. Accessed 28 Jan 2011

  • Lüderitz V, Jüpner R (2009) Renaturierung von Fließgewässern. In: Zerbe S, Wiegleb G (Hrsg.) Renaturierung von Ökosystemen in Mitteleuropa.Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 95–124

  • Malmqvist B, Rundle S (2002) Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world. Environ Conserv 29:134–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malynovsky A, Petrova L, Soroka M, Tretyak P (2007) The principles of the transboundary system of nature environment protection “The Upper Bug”. Lviv State Museum of Nature History of the National Academy of Sciencies, 2007.06.10. http://sites.google.com/site/platontretyak/theprinciplesofthetransboundarysystemofn. Accessed 02 Sept 2010

  • Moog O, Schmidt-Kloiber A, Ofenböck T, Gerritsen J (2004) Does the ecoregion approach support the typological demands of the EU ‘Water Framework Directive’? Hydrobiologia 516:21–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muhar S (1996) Habitat improvement of Austrian rivers with regard to different spatial scales. Regul Rivers Res Manage 12:471–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muhar S, Jungwirth M (1998) Habitat integrity of running waters—assessment criteria and their biological relevance. Hydrobiologia 386:195–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muhar S, Schwarz M, Schmutz S, Jungwirth M (2000) Identification of rivers with high and good habitat quality: methodological approach and applications in Austria. Hydrobiologia 422(423):343–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mylopoulos Y, Kolokytha E, Kampragou E, Vagiona D (2008) A combined methodology for trans-boundary river basin management in Europe. Application in the Nestos-Mesta catchment area. Water Resour Manage 22:1101–1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson C, Reidy CA, Dynesius M, Revenga C (2005) Fragmentation and flow regulation of the world’s large river systems. Science 308:405–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nazarov N, Cook HF, Woodgate G (2000) Water pollution control issues in an independent Ukraine. Water Environ J 14:117–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obodovskyi OG, Yarishevych OE (2005) Hydromophological assessement of river quality in the catchment of Verkhnya/Upper Tysa (trans: Oбoдoвcький OГ, Яpoшeвич OЄ (2005) Гiдpoмopфoлoгiчнa oцiнкa якocтi piчoк бaceйнy вepxньoϊ Tиcи, report)

  • O’Hare MT, Baattrup-Pedersen A, Nijboer R, Szoszkiewicz K, Ferreira T (2006) Macrophyte communities of European streams with altered physical habitat. Hydrobiologia 566:197–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons M, Thoms M, Norris R (2001) Australien river assessment system AusRivAS Physical Assessment Protocol. Montioring the river health intitiative. Technical report number 22. National River Health Program. University of Canberra and Commonwealth of Australia, Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology, University of Canberra. http://ausrivas.canberra.edu.au/Geoassessment/Physchem/. Accessed 5 Sept 2010

  • Pavlik D, Söhl D. Pluntke T, Myknovych A, Bernhofer C (2011) Dynamic downscaling of global climate projections for Eastern Europe with a horizontal resolution of 7 km. Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-011-1081-1 (this issue)

  • Pekarova P, Onderka M, Pekar J, Roncak P, Miklanek P (2009) Prediction of water quality in the Danube River under extreme hydrological and temperature conditions. J Hydrol Hydromech 57:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen ML, Ovesen NB, Friberg GN, Clausen B, Lehotský M, Grešková A (2004) Hydromorphological assessment protocol for the Slovak Republic. ANNEX 1, pp 1–35. http://www.shmu.sk/File/implementacia_rsv/twinning/a1_Protocol_final.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2011

  • Pedersen ML, Baattrup-Pedersen A (2003) National monitoring programme 2003–2009. Assessment methods manual. National Environmental Research Institute of Denmark. Technical Report no. 21

  • Pysek P, Bacher S, Chytry M, Jarosik V, Wild J, Celesti-Grapow L, Gasso N, Kenis M, Lambdon PW, Nentwig W, Pergl J, Roques A, Sadlo J, Solarz W, Vila M, Hulme PE (2010) Contrasting patterns in the invasions of European terrestrial and freshwater habitats by alien plants, insects and vertebrates. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:317–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raven PJ, Holmes NTH, Vaughan IP, Dawson FH, Scarlett P (2010) Benchmarking habitat quality: observations using River Habitat Survey on near-natural streams and rivers in northern and Western Europe. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 20:13–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raven PJ, Holmes NTH, Charrier P, Dawson FH, Naura M, Boon PJ (2002) Towards a harmonized approach for hydromorphological assessment of rivers in Europe: a qualitative comparison of three survey methods. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 12:405–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raven PJ, Holmes NTH, Naura M, Dawson FH (2000) Using River Habitat Survey for environmental assessment and catchment planning in the UK. Hydrobiologia 422(423):359–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raven PJ, Holmes NTH, Dawson FH, Fox PJA, Everard M, Fozzard IR, Rouen KJ (1998) River habitat quality: the physical character of rivers and streams in the uk and Isle of Man. River Habitat Survey, Report No. 2. Environment Agency, Bristol

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandin L, Hering D (2004) Comparing macroinvertebrate indices to detect organic pollution across Europe: a contribution to the EC Water Framework Directive intercalibration. Hydrobiologia 516:55–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandin L (2009) The effects of catchment land-use, near-stream vegetation, and river hydro-morphology on benthic macro invertebrate communities in a south-Swedish catchment. Fundam Appl Limnol 174:75–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schanze J, Trümper J, Burmeister C, Pavlik D, Kruhlov I (2011) A methodology for dealing with regional change in integrated water resource management. Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-011-1311-6 (this issue)

  • Sommerhäuser M, Pottgiesser T (2005) Die Fliessgewässertypen Deutschlands als Beitrag zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie. Limnologie aktuell 11:13–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Szoszkiewicz K, Buffagni A, Davy-Bowker J, Lesny J, Chojnicki BH, Zbierska J, Staniszewski R, Zgola T (2006) Occurrence and variability of River Habitat Survey features across Europe and the consequences for data collection and evaluation. Hydrobiologia 566:267–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tacis (2001) Bug and Latorica/Uzh. Transboundary water quality monitoring and assessment. Summary report and recommendations of the project. Technical report, European Commission

  • Tacis (2006) The bug river corridor in the pan European ecological network a feasibility study BBI-Matra Project 2006/015

  • Tavares T, Tarasuik M, Myknovych A, Kit M, Feger KH, Schwärzel K (2011) Estimation of spatially distributed soil information. Dealing with data shortages in the Western Bug Basin, Ukraine. Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-011-1197-3 (this issue)

  • UN (2000) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly.55/2. United Nations Millennium Declaration. Fifty-fifth session Agenda item 60 (b). 18 September 2000. http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.pdf. Accessed 23 Nov 2010

  • UN (2006) Workshop on transboundary water management at the north-eastern border of the European Union: the complementary roles of the EU water framework directive and the UNECE water convention. Meeting of the parties to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes. ECE/MP.WAT/SEM.6/2005/2, 14 November 2006, Economic Commision for Europe, Seminar paper. http://www.unece.org/env/documents/2005/wat/sem.6/mp.wat.sem.6.2005.2e.pdf. Accessed 05 Sept 2010

  • UNDP Ukraine (2010) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Ministry of Economy of Ukraine 2010: Millenium Development Goals Ukraine – 2010 National Report, Kyiv 2010, p 110. http://www.undp.org.ua/en/millennium-development-goals/mdgs-in-ukraine. Accessed 21 Nov 2010

  • Vaikasas S, Dumbrauskas A (2010) Self-purification process and retention of nitrogen in floodplains of River Nemunas. Hydrol Res 41:338–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan IP, Diamond M, Gurnell AM, Hall KA, Jenkins A, Milner NJ, Naylor LA, Sear DA, Woodward G, Ormerod SJ (2009) Integrating ecology with hydromorphology: a priority for river science and management. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 19:113–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von der Ohe PC, Prub A, Schafer RB, Liess M, de Deckere E, Brack W (2007) Water quality indices across Europe—a comparison of the good ecological status of five river basins. J Environ Monit 9:970–978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yanko NV (2008) Ecological problems of the anthropogenic burden–transboundary monitoring of the Bug river basin. In: Zieba MS (ed) Our Bug. Creating conditions for development of the border areas of Poland, Ukraine and Belarus through enhancement and preservation of natural and cultural heritage. House of Catholic University of Lublin, Lublin, pp 49–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaroshevych O, Obodovskyi O (2005) Bericht über die Durchführung der hydromorphologischen Untersuchungen auf dem Fluss Solokia (Ukraine-Polen-Weißrussland). Kiew. Tacis-Projekt (Europe Aid/120422/C SVIUA-1)

  • Zingstra H, Simeonova V, Kitnaes K (2009) Protection and management of the Bug River as an ecological corridor in the Pan European Ecological Network. Final report of the BBI-MATRA project 2006/015. Technical report, Wageningen International. http://www.cdi.wur.nl/NR/rdonlyres/EA225EE7-7A43-4485-A4BC-0DAADAD54D51/85640/FinalReportBugRiver.pdf. Accessed 21 Nov 2010

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research was part of the International Water Research Alliance Saxony (IWAS, http://www.iwas-sachsen.ufz.de), funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF, Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, http://www.wasserressourcen-management.de, Grant No.: FKZ 02WM1028). We gratefully acknowledge the support of the Western Bug Basin Department during our field campaigns notably the assistance of M. Shpanchyk, P. Drachuk and the support of V. Bondaruk. We also thank all our student assistants for their valuable help during the field work and partly for their bilingual support. Many thanks to our all IWAS (Ukraine) colleagues and particularly to O. Manturova, T. Bodnarschuk and V. Motyl who helped to improvise by some means or other or subdue certain obstacles on the way. We also thank K. Nikoleyczik, A.-M. Ertel and T. Petzoldt for their helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript and A. Hopes for improving language and style. The valuable comments of the editor O. Kolditz, two anonymous reviewers and P.J. Raven are further greatly acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Hydrobiology, Technische Universität Dresden, 01062, Dresden, Germany

    Nicole Scheifhacken, Ulrike Haase & Thomas U. Berendonk

  2. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Permoserstraße 15, 04318, Leipzig, Germany

    Lesya Gram-Radu

  3. Western Bug Basin Department (Зaxiднo-Бyзькe бaceйнoвe yпpaвлiння вoдниx pecypciв БУBP), March Street 8, Lutsk, 43005, Ukraine

    Roman Kozovyi

Authors
  1. Nicole Scheifhacken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ulrike Haase
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lesya Gram-Radu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roman Kozovyi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thomas U. Berendonk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicole Scheifhacken.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scheifhacken, N., Haase, U., Gram-Radu, L. et al. How to assess hydromorphology? A comparison of Ukrainian and German approaches. Environ Earth Sci 65, 1483–1499 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-011-1218-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-011-1218-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation